Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/01/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Nikkor 85 mm (off topic, really!)
From: "Stefan Kahlert" <uzs13b@ibm.rhrz.uni-bonn.de>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:39:45 +0000

> 	''The 85f2 never seemed to catch on with Nikon users. It was
> intended to fill the shoes of the discontinued 85f1.8 which it really
> couldn't do. ... The lens never changed in design or cosmetics during its
> production run. It's one of the Nikon lenses that is not highly
> regarded.''

I may be wrong about that, but to me this statement doesn't tell
much about the optical properties of this lens. 

Your excerpt says the lens didn't "catch on with Nikon users".
To me this means the *users* were not hot after this lense. 
No reason is given here.

The old 1.8/85 was legendary and probably every lense that would have 
come after it couldn't fill "its shoes" in the users eyes
(And there was the 1.4/85. The 2/85 was always the ugly little 
sister, the cheapy 85mm. Not a good ground for a great reputation).
If the author refers to bad optical performance why didn't he say 
that? 

And "not highly regarded" tells only what came to the authors ears.
Again this just tells that people didn't sell their souls for 
this lense. But was this actually a bad lense? And what was so bad 
about it? The author doesn't comment on that. 

I prefer to trust somone as David Ruether with whom I had some 
correspondence about the 2.8/180 AF EDIF about half a year ago.
In his "subjective lense evaluations" (available over the net,
I can look up the URLs if anyone is interested)
he ranks all Nikon 85mm lenses (F-mount) at the same high level
(with some comments on specifics as good close-range performance 
due to CRC in the 1.4 or a very good performance wide open in 
the 1.8). 
He states the number of samples he tested and includes the 
variation he found between the samples.
His evaluations may be subjective and do not come from an MTF-Bench
but they are carried out sorrowly with a good portion of scepticism
about the own methods (he described this with his first impression
of the 24-120mm Nikkor in rec.photo.equipment.35mm).

In any case this is worth more than a "I don't kow but people talk 
dirty  about this lense"-statement from a Nikon-Wiz.

And after all my experience with this "not highly regarded" lens
were very good, a bit better than with my former 
Minolta MD 100mm/2.5 which hasn't a bad reputation and a bit
different than with the old 1.8/85 I now have.
I can't tell which Nikkor I prefer.

I am curious how the Nikon 85ers compare to the Leica 90mm lenses
(we already discussed the 75mm Summilux and maybe we can bring this 
thread back onto leica-teritory this way)?

Any experiences or direct comparisons?


best regards


Stefan
- --
Stefan Kahlert
my location: Bonn, Germany, Europe. 
uzs13b@uni-bonn.de